Wednesday, September 19, 2012

United Nations Response to Innocence of Muslims: Treason Against Humanity!

United Nations Response to Innocence of Muslims: Treason Against Humanity! Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser, President of the 66th session of the General Assembly spoke September 12, 2012 about defamation of religious symbols. I will extract the most crucial words and phrases while providing a link so that curious readers can access the entire article. 

  • condemns and deplores in the strongest terms
    • defamation of
    • religions
    • religious symbols
  • such acts amount to
    •  incitement to hatred
      • international instability
      • violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter
  • enhance dialogue and broaden understanding

    Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman had remarks September 13.

  • condemns the hateful film
    •  deliberately designed to sow
      • bigotry
      • bloodshed

    Secretary-General's remarks to Opening Session of the General Assembly High-Level Forum on the Culture of Peace 08/14/12

  • hateful
  • disgusting
  • It is shameful to exploit the fundamental right to free expression by deliberately provoking bigotry and bloodshed

    Secretary-General's remarks at the Church of the Holy Family 09-17-12

  • hatred and provocation
  • priest or lama  … rabbi or imam
    • standard bearers of
      • reason and respect
  • People everywhere look to religious leaders for guidance, support and direction.
    • promoting tolerance
      • mutual understanding
      • mutual respect

    At the opening of Session 67, Ban addressed the issue again.

  • incidents of
    • intolerance
    • hatred
  • We all need to speak up in favour of
    • mutual respect
    • understanding
      • of the
        • values
        • beliefs 

I am embedding the video here in case you have not yet viewed it.  I want you to ignore the lousy casting, acting and production values; concentrate on the conceptual content. 

    The video does not direct its audience to take any action.  Viewers are not exhorted to hate Muslims, deface tomb stones or destroy mosques.  It simply presents information about current persecution of Copts in Egypt with impunity & official complicity,  and the character & works of the founder of Islam. 

    This post is not concerned with the truth or fallacy of the conceptual content, that issue is detailed and documented with quotes from and links to Islam's canon in another blog post: .

    Islam divides the world into two houses: Dar ul-Islam and Dar ul-Harb. The house of war is wherever Allah's writ does not run.  Muslims are at war against it to total conquest or the end of the world, whichever come first.  Those who deny the fact of existential conflict, seek to conceal it and distract our attention from it also seek to prevent us from sounding a warning of impending danger so that our nations will be unwilling or unable to defend us.  They are traitors to the human race.   I shall proceed with the task of contradicting the traitors point by point. 

defamation of religions

    The video's subject is Moe, the founder of Islam; neither a religion nor a religious symbol, Moe is a historical personage who has been in his grave since 632. Moe has no knowledge of the video, and is not harmed by it in any way. 

    Islam can not be defamed; it is already infamous, having caused the premature deaths of an estimated 270*106 innocent people.  A few statesmen discerned the truth about it.  Did Montesquieu defame Islam?  Should he have been prosecuted and imprisoned or beheaded for uttering & publishing this?

From the characters of the Christian and Mahometan religions, we ought, without any further examination, to embrace the one and reject the other: for it is much easier to prove that religion ought to humanise the manners of men than that any particular religion is true.

It is a misfortune to human nature when religion is given by a conqueror. The Mahometan religion, which speaks only by the sword, acts still upon men with that destructive spirit with which it was founded.

    Did John Q. Adams defame Islam? Should he have been prosecuted and decapitated for uttering and publishing this?

"In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, [.....] Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST.- TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.... Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant ... While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men."

    Did Winston Churchill defame Islam? Should he have been prosecuted and decapitated for uttering and publishing this?

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

    Will anyone consider the possibility that those statesmen read the Qur'an and studied history sufficiently to know of the havoc wreaked by Muhammad and the four rightfully guided caliphs?  Why did Adams call Moe a false prophet? Why did he declare Islam inimical to peace? Were these hatemongers? Were they attempting to incite riots and provoke international conflict or warning against that which is so engaged? 

    Islam stands or falls on the foundation of one man: Moe, who, alone, heard the revelations from Jibril and recited them to his companions.  If Moe is proven to be a false prophet who attributed to God words not spoken by him, then Islam must eventually crumble like a vampire exposed to bright sunlight.  Open Sahih Bukhari to 6.60.311 to obtain a clue. 

incitement to hatred

    Has it ever crossed their weak little minds that Islam should be an object of intense hatred?  Was it wrong to hate Nazism in WW2 or Communism in the Cold War?  Can any sentient and moral person know about the Hindu, Assyrian & Armenian genocides without hating Islam? 

    What if Moe really was a child molester?  What if he really did have Kinana tortured to death before raping his widow?  What if his henchmen tied Um Qirfa's legs to two camels and drive them in opposite directions?  Should Moe and the crime syndicate he founded be objects of hatred or not?   Click these links to Qur'an verses, then tell me, in a comment, who incited hatred and violence. 

international instability

    Islam's critics are accused of threatening world peace. What is the true threat to world peace?  Will you obtain a clue?  J.Q. Adams gave us one earlier.

violates UN Charter

    How could publication of a short video by a private individual acting on his own accord, without complicity of any government agency violate the UN Charter?  Is it possible that Muslim mobs, attacking Embassies and murdering an Ambassador with government complicity violated the Charter? 

enhance dialogue

    Is it possible to have a real dialogue with Muslims?  Can Pope Benedict discuss Surah At-Taubah with the Sheiks of Al-Azhar at Cairo? Does anyone recall "A Common Word Between Us and You"?  I created one blog to deliar that camel crap!

broaden understanding

    Anyone who is ignorant of Islam's founding, doctrines and practices will have a better understanding thereof after viewing "Innocence of Muslims" and might even be stimulated to read the Qur'an & hadith to which I have linked. 

condemns the hateful film

    I condemn the hateful man it depicts and the continuing criminal enterprise he founded: Islam. The film is truthful, not hateful.  Islam is false, hateful and predatory. 

deliberately designed to sow


    Bigotry is a hidebound adherence to prejudiced opinion in the face of the facts.  The facts about Islam, exposed in the video, make it worthy of condemnation. Your failure to condemn Islam is bigotry. Your condemnation of the video is bigotry.  The UN is led by bigots. 


    Where in "Innocence of Muslims" is the call to arms?  Where is the exhortation to wage war?  But they are in the Qur'an;  can you obtain a clue?  I provided a list of links to it above.  Follow the links to Surah Al-Anfal 8 & Surah At-Taubah 9 to obtain a clue.  The riots do not flow from the video, they flow from the mosques at Jumah Salat and from state run or state sanctioned mass media.


    What is hateful about "Innocence of Muslims"?  Have you ever heard about Wala wal Bara?  It is "love and hate for the sake of Allah". Allah loves those who "fight in his cause" and hates everyone who is not Muslim.  Get a clue. 


    Sentient and rational viewers, not bigots, will be disgusted by the reality of Moe's character & actions and the doctrines & practices of the crime syndicate he disguised as a religion.  Bigots are disgusted by exposure of Islam as a continuing crime against humanity. 


    "It is shameful to exploit the fundamental right to free expression by deliberately provoking bigotry and bloodshed".

free expression

    In a representative republic, freedom of speech is required to facilitate open discussion of political issues, personalities and affairs of state. The threat of war is one of those issues which must be discussed freely, without fear of assault or persecution.  Islam inculcates hatred and incites violence; promising its acolytes eternal bliss in Allah's celestial bordello if they go to war and threatening them with eternal damnation if they shirk.  We can not successfully defend ourselves against the real, proximate and persistent threat of Islamic aggression which began when we gained independence from England, without honest and open discussion of the doctrines & practices of Islam.  Our first foreign wars were in defense of our merchantmen against Islamic piracy. 


    The video provokes thought and study of Islam's canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis, jurisprudence and biography. It does not provoke violence.  In the last three days, 49 viewers were drawn to Islam Exposed by inquiries into the veracity of the video.  In the same time period, my post on the truth of the video was viewed 102 times on that blog. 


    Bigotry is provoked by bigots: those who, without reason, in clear contravention of the facts presented in the video, condemn it and its creator & publisher.


    Bloodshed is provoked by Imams whose rabble rousing kutbah include shouts of the takbir and "jihad!". "Allah hu akbar" is a war cry, Muslims know it and they respond to it.  


    Standard bearers of reason & respect and  promoting tolerance & understanding. Yeah, right.  Why is most of the Hell raised after 2p.m. local time on Fridays?  Get a clue for Chrissake!


    The video is not intolerant nor is it the product of intolerance.  Islam is intolerant: 3:85 and the context of 3:110 and the hadith which explains it demonstrate that fact.  Declaring perpetual war against  pagans, Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians, that's tolerant.  Yeah, right. 


    Respect is given to whom respect is due, Islam does not deserve any, it is pure, unmitigated evil; a war crime against humanity. 


    Those of us who have read the Qur'an & Hadith and delved into tafsir, Shari'ah & The Life of Muhammad understand Islam.  To whatever extent the video stimulates reading Islam's canon, understanding will become more widespread.


    Islam places a premium on "jihad in Allah's cause", which was described by Moe as Islam's "peak" and the "best deed". Any step taken to injure or enrage infidels is imputed to the Muslim terrorist as a "deed of righteousness"; extra credit toward an upgrade to his seat in the celestial bordello.  The life of this world is but a passtime: the real action is in the celestial bordello.


    The world was created by Allah, who owns it and everything on it. Allah gave the works to Moe and shared ruling it with him.  Only Allah has the right to be worshiped. Only Allah has the right to legislate. Think I am joking?

No comments: